The Web     
Powered by
powered by Yahoo!
Return to Transcripts main page


Safe Return of Elizabeth Smart Seen as Proof AMBER Works; Bush Backing Down on Call for Key U.N. Members to Vote on Resolution

Aired March 13, 2003 - 16:00   ET


ED SMART, ELIZABETH SMART'S FATHER: All of the children out there deserve to come home to their parents the way, the way Elizabeth has come back to us. And I just hope and pray that Congress will quickly pass the AMBER Alert.

ANNOUNCER: Smart politics. A kidnapped girl's safe return nine months later creates great expectations on Capitol Hill.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There is no excuse for delaying the enactment of the AMBER Bill any further.

ANNOUNCER: The luck of the Irish? The president takes a ceremonial break from Iraq diplomacy with the timing and outcome of a U.N. vote up in the air.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The responsibilities of freedom are not always easy to bear.

ANNOUNCER: Desert Storm's bad weather may be nothing compared to all of the things that could go wrong in a war with Iraq.

Move over Saddam. Abortion opponents claim a victory over their enemy number one.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's nice to see that the United States Senate, when it sees evil, will do something to stop evil.


ANNOUNCER: Live from Washington, this is INSIDE POLITICS with Judy Woodruff.

JUDY WOODRUFF, CNN ANCHOR: Well, whatever anger the Smart family may be feeling toward some members of Congress, the joy of being reunited with Elizabeth is evident on their faces. For now, they seem willing to wait to answer the many questions that remain about her ordeal. CNN's Jeanne Meserve is with us now live from Salt Lake City -- Jeanne.

JEANNE MESERVE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Judy, we may be learning a little bit more about Brian David Mitchell. He is the man suspected in this case. The San Diego County Sheriff's Office tells us that a man who bore a striking resemblance to him was picked up in San Diego after burglarizing a church, and he was held out there in the county jail between February 12 to February 18. He pled guilty to vandalism. Right now, police in Salt Lake City are exchanging fingerprints with the San Diego county sheriff to figure out if, indeed, they are talking about the same individual.

Police here in Salt Lake also busy today looking in these mountains, you can see behind me. It is believed that Elizabeth may have been held up in there for as long as three months after she was taken from her home.

Joining me now is Tom Smart and his daughter, Amanda. Tom is the uncle, Amanda a cousin of Elizabeth. Tom, you know that Mitchell was sighted up in that area, don't you?

TOM SMART, ELIZABETH'S UNCLE: Yes, since 1991, apparently, he's been hiking these hills back here. And in this particular camp we're talking about, a friend of mine had seen him there not last summer, but the summer before. And that's how he had the coordinates about where the police went there and flew over it, I think about three weeks ago.

MESERVE: But they didn't search it?

T. SMART: They didn't serve it. Obviously, no one had been up there. There was snow and stuff like that. And our critical thing was finding Elizabeth, but they were on to that lead.

MESERVE: Now, one of the Elizabeth's other uncles came very close to her apparently during the search. Tell us about that.

T. SMART: Well, apparently, in the first few days that she heard her Uncle David call out and, you know, for whatever reason she wasn't able to respond. But that's pretty amazing that we were that close, you know. It's about three and a half miles back here. It's pretty rough and a very, very remote place. Of course, we had a very tight grid close to the family, and then the grid got a little bit less tight further back.

MESERVE: I think we have pictures on the air that you took this morning of a reunion. And, Amanda, you just spent some time with Elizabeth about an hour. Tell us how she is.

AMANDA SMART, ELIZABETH'S COUSIN: She looks really, really good. And she looks really healthy. And she had a smile on her face the whole time. I think she's really happy to be home.

MESERVE: You were telling me the family sang her "Happy Birthday".

A. SMART: Yes, we ordered pizza because her birthday was in November and we, obviously, missed it. But we all sang her "Happy Birthday" and she just had a big smile on her face the whole time.

MESERVE: You also talked about coming outside with some balloons.

A. SMART: We went outside and we all had a baby blue balloon, and there was like at least 18 of us, and we all just said, hooray Elizabeth, and we let the balloons go. And we just watched them float up.

MESERVE: Is she talking at all about the past nine months?

A. SMART: No, not to us. She just sat there and listened to everything we had to say and we just kind of tried to catch up about, you know, just little stuff.

MESERVE: Does she seem changed to you?

A. SMART: I don't know. She's always been really quiet and sweet, and she's still quiet and sweet and has a big smile on her face. So, you know, I don't think she's ...

T. SMART: She's our Elizabeth.

A. SMART: And she's still sweet and innocent and we love her.

MESERVE: Very happy times. Thank you both for joining us today. Elizabeth's grandmother said today for the family, this is Thanksgiving in March, and they're enjoying it.

Judy, back to you.

WOODRUFF: Celebration all around. Jeanne Meserve, thank you very much.

Well, the fact that Elizabeth Smart was found has called for an urgent need to pass a so-called national AMBER Alert laws. These laws were introduced -- or rather bills were introduced some time ago. But now the call is urgent for the Congress to pass them. Let's go quickly now to our congressional correspondent Jonathan Karl.

It was Elizabeth Smart's father who today criticized a member of Congress for holding up this AMBER Alert.

JONATHAN KARL, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: That's right. Amidst the euphoria over finding his daughter, Ed Smart lashed out in a very personal and negative way at one very specific member of Congress, the chairman of the judiciary committee, Jim Sensenbrenner. The AMBER Alert program had passed the Senate earlier this year by a 92-0 vote. As far as Ed Smart's concerned it's been blocked up in the Congress, over in the House. And the fault lies squarely on the shoulders of Jim Sensenbrenner.


E. SMART: I am asking all of the constituents of Wisconsin to call Jim Sensenbrenner, to know that this has got to come stand alone legislation, that it is not something that can wait one more day. Lives are lost and the blood of those children is on someone's head.


KARL: Now, Sensenbrenner, and he has the support of the Republican leadership over in the House, says that he's all for AMBER Alert, but he wants to see a broader bill that would include not just AMBER Alert, but also other measures, such as a 20-year minimum sentence for kidnapping, also a mandatory life sentence for twice convicted sex offenders, the so-called two strikes and you're out provision.

And, also, he has in his bill that he's proposing $20 million in money for the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. That would be doubling of the federal funding for that specific program. Sensenbrenner came out today, as a matter of fact, just about a half hour ago, at a press conference and defended himself, and defended the position that he is taking on having a more comprehensive approach to dealing with this issue.


REP. JAMES SENSENBRENNER (R-WI), JUDICIARY CHAIRMAN: For the protection of our children, we need to pass these provisions as well as a properly drafted AMBER Alert. And it is better to do it right the first time, rather than doing something that is not what people anticipate is happening.


KARL: Now, Sensenbrenner's bill, which includes those other measures as well as AMBER Alert, did pass in the House last year by an overwhelming margin with over 390 votes. But Sensenbrenner is under pressure not just from Ed Smart, but also from members of his own party.

Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas, held a press conference today also echoing the calls for Sensenbrenner and the House Republicans to bring up the AMBER Alert program on its own, in a separate bill, making it possible to pass it very quickly to get it signed by the president. Saying that if Sensenbrenner insists on going further with these other measures, it will simply delay the process. And in Kay Bailey Hutchison's view as well as the Smart family's view, this AMBER Alert program should go into effect right now -- Judy.

WOODRUFF: Well, John, just quickly, the Republican leadership still holding off for the larger bill, right?

KARL: Absolutely, Tom DeLay joined Jim Sensenbrenner at his press conference, and they've also pointed out that 38 states have AMBER Alert programs. And the president, under executive order, has also put some money out there for AMBER Alert.

WOODRUFF: John Karl at the Capitol, thanks very much.

Well, back to our lead story today and that is faced with an uphill battle over war with Iraq, President Bush appears to be backing down on his call for key U.N. members to, quote, "show their cards this week." In this "NewsCycle," as the Security Council meets again this hour, the White House says it's willing to extend behind the scenes consultations into the weekend. Secretary of State Colin Powell now says there may not be any vote at all.


COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: We are still talking to the members of the council to see what is possible with respect to coalescing around a position that wouldn't draw a veto. But the option remains to go for the -- the options remain go for a vote and see what members say, or not go for a vote. But there are -- all the options that you can imagine are before us and we'll be examining them today, tomorrow and into the weekend.


WOODRUFF: In hopes of gaining U.N. support, Britain says that it would be willing to drop one of its proposed benchmarks for Saddam Hussein. And that is that he deliver a televised address renouncing weapons of mass destruction.

In a possible counter move by Iraq, sources say that Baghdad will give the U.N. its report on the destruction of VX nerve agent tomorrow, and deliver a similar report on anthrax in the next few days. More now on the showdown with Iraq and the new uncertainty about when or if there will be a U.N. Security Council vote. CNN's Suzanne Malveaux is at the White House.

Suzanne, what are they saying at this point?

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Judy, one senior administration official put it to me this way. He said that everything is in a state of play, everything is in a state of flux.

Earlier today, President Bush met with a prime minister of Ireland in a St. Patrick's Day shamrock celebration, but also to thank him for support on Resolution 1441 calling for Saddam Hussein to disarm. The president did cancel an event that he had on the Hill to make critical calls, most notably to British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

It has become very clear the administration is doing everything in its power to get the second U.N. resolution passed. Earlier in the week, the administration had called for a vote by the end of the week, tomorrow, but senior administration officials coming out publicly now saying that they will continue to consult over the weekend.

Also now, Judy, a question of whether or not that is even going to go before the U.N. for a vote. Last Thursday, President Bush was adamant that U.S. Security Council members take a stand. But again, today, senior administration officials seemingly backing off that position.


BUSH: No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council. And so, you bet. It's time for people to show their cards. Let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam.

ARI FLEISCHER, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: There are numerous options to achieving the end the president seeks, a diplomatic solution. I cannot predict for you every shape and turn of the road on the way to that end, but this end is coming into sight. And that's why you're seeing levels of flexibility and discussion of options as it comes into sight.


MALVEAUX: So Ari Fleischer says it's about more flexibility about the president really going the last mile when it comes to the diplomacy.

Also, Judy, there is another White House strategy, of course, a war of words with France. France has threatened to veto the resolution. Several administration officials speaking out against that, trying to put pressure on France. One administration telling me, and I'm quoting here, "It seems that France is more intent on restraining the U.S. than disarming Saddam Hussein" -- Judy.

WOODRUFF: One administration official I talked to today, Suzanne, described it as shifting sands right now.

MALVEAUX: Absolutely.

WOODRUFF: OK, Suzanne, thank you very much.

Along the military front, war preparations continue to move forward. B-2 stealth bombers headed closer to Iraq today from their base in Missouri. The ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services committee calls that a sign that military action will begin soon.

In Kuwait, U.S. and British troops face the fallout from a severe sand storm overnight. And a senior U.S. military official in the region says the Iraq government has reinforced its military power near its border with Kuwait over the past week.

Here at home, many Americans still are asking questions about the reasons war may be at hand. Let's bring in our senior political analyst, Bill Schneider.

WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Judy, why is the U.S. ready to go to war with Iraq. One question, several answers. Let's try to sort them out.


SCHNEIDER (voice-over): Reason No. 1, it's all about oil. That's what the rest of the world seems to think. But most Americans don't believe it. And experts say while the oil industry wants the oil, it doesn't want to fight a war to get it. The reason the Bush administration gives for war is 9/11, specifically, to prevent another 9/11.

BUSH: September the 11th should say to the American people that we're now a battlefield, that weapons of mass destruction in the hands of a terrorist organization could be deployed here at home.

SCHNEIDER: Americans buy that argument. Even to the point of believing, as many do, that Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the 9/11 attacks.

But there's evidence the Bush administration was talking about war with Iraq long before 9/11. David Frum, a former White House speechwriter, writes about a meeting at the White House in February 2001, at which the president spoke about his determination to dig Saddam Hussein out of power in Iraq.

Bob Woodward writes, "Before the attacks, the Pentagon had been working for months on developing a military option for Iraq." We know that influential neo-conservatives have been arguing for years in favor of an assertive U.S. strategy in the post-Cold War world.

Figures like Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz and Vice President Dick Cheney.

PETER HATCHER, "AUSTRALIAN FINANCIAL REVIEW": This is about the neo-conservative view, the idealistic view, the Wilsonian view that the world will be a better place if only America can make it that way.

SCHNEIDER: They advocate a mission to spread American values by asserting American power, even by force. Their champion, John McCain, now a war hawk.

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: We must keep our nerve, have the courage to understand what our experiences have taught us, have faith in the necessity and rightness of our cause and do what must be done to make this a safer, freer, better world.

SCHNEIDER: Has President Bush adopted their cause? Apparently, yes.

BUSH: By the resolve and purpose of America, and of our friends and allies, we will make this an age of progress and liberty. Free people will set the course of history and free people will keep the peace of the world.


SCHNEIDER: It's a bold, ambitious, and risky agenda. But it just may be the real reason why America is about to go to war -- Judy.

WOODRUFF: All right. Bill Schneider, thanks very much. People do have those questions.

There's much more ahead in this hour. Will Elizabeth Smart's family get their wish for a national AMBER Alert program? I'll talk to a co-sponsor of an AMBER Alert bill in the House, Republican Jennifer Dunn. South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford soon heads for training in the Air Force Reserves. I'll ask him about the threat of war and how he'll juggle his job to his country and his state.

Still on the mend from heart surgery, senator and presidential hopeful Bob Graham returns to Capitol Hill. Find out what threw him back into action.

This is INSIDE POLITICS, the place for campaign news.


WOODRUFF: Are war worries keeping you from going shopping? A new report says yes. Coming up, we'll go live to Wall Street for an eye on your money.

And later, more hot water for a Congressman who made some controversial comments. We'll have the latest.


WOODRUFF (voice-over): It's time to check your "I.P. I.Q." South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford will go to Alabama later this month for two weeks of Reserve training.

Sanford isn't the only South Carolinian to have military obligations. There are two other sitting lawmakers that do as well. Who are they? A: Senator Ernest Hollings, B: Senator Lindsay Graham, C: Representative Joe Wilson or D: Representative James Clyburn? And remember, you can pick two. We'll tell you the answer later on INSIDE POLITICS.




E. SMART: I'm calling upon all of the Congressmen. I'm calling upon everyone out here in the United States to call your Congressman, tell them this legislation needs to come to the floor, stand alone, and that you want it and let them know, and let them be accountable, because they are accountable to us.


WOODRUFF: Strong words from the father of Elizabeth Smart have put lawmakers on the spot in the debate over a national AMBER Alert system.

With me now from Capitol Hill, Republican Representative Jennifer Dunn of Washington. She's a co-sponsor of the AMBER Alert bill. Congresswoman Dunn, who is right in this? Is it Congressman Sensenbrenner who argues that AMBER Alert should pass, but only as part of a more comprehensive bill, getting other protection for missing children in there? Or is Ed Smart right in saying get the AMBER Alert bill out on its own?

REP. JENNIFER DUNN (R), WASHINGTON: Well, I think they're both right, Judy. And the reason is we're elated. We're celebrating the homecoming of a beautiful little girl to a family that has been working behind AMBER Alert since last August when they lost their child. Ed has been a huge advocate of our work for AMBER Alert.

I don't care how we get it passed. I just want to get it passed soon. And what has been decided so far by leadership, is that the bill that we passed in subcommittee on Tuesday will be considered next week on the floor of the House. And I think that's huge strides forward. We'll have AMBER Alert as a portion of a larger bill.

I think everybody together wants to get this passed because we believe every other parent ought to have the same wonderful feelings that Ed and Lois Smart have had as they welcome their child back into their arms.

WOODRUFF: But, Congresswoman, up until now, the AMBER Alert has been held up because of a desire to get these other protections passed. Now, what is going to break the logjam now? Is it because of Elizabeth Smarts, that fact that she's been found?

DUNN: I think it's very important that Elizabeth came home and became a factor in this, because it gets the education done that we need to do to get behind this bill. But we had, literally, passed this bill in subcommittee the day before she came home. So, it's a bit of a coincidence.

It's important to note that last fall both the Senate and the House passed AMBER Alert and we all remember the logjam of legislation. It never got to a conference committee and so it never got signed by the president.

But we're going to pass this bill this coming week so we can get it off to the president after a conference committee and get this thing into action as soon as is possible, considering a bit of a complicated legislative schedule.

WOODRUFF: So, you don't think it's going to be necessary for someone to step in and separate out AMBER Alert as Ed Smart is calling for, and separate it out and pass it quickly on its own?

DUNN: Well, we're going to pass it quickly. Whether it's on its own or part of a bill, as I'm saying, you can't get much quicker than next week. I would prefer to see it separate, but that's a judgment that has to be made by the leadership.

And I don't think it matters. I think what I've heard leadership say is that even if it's part of a larger bill, even if there is a problem in the conference committee, this bill will not be allowed to languish. So we may be changing our plans as we move, but we need to get it done.

WOODRUFF: Mr. Smart used very strong language. He accused Congressman Sensenbrenner, he said, "He is hurting children." He talked about the blood of children being on his hands. Very strong language.

DUNN: Ed Smart is a wonderful man. And it's a very sensitive time for him. And he's just welcomed his child back, and he cares a lot about this, as I do, as my co-author does, Martin Frost from Texas.

But we all simply want to get it done. And I think the fact that he has been so helpful in bringing public awareness to our legislation. And now everybody knows about it, everybody is talking about AMBER. We're going to get it done next week. And that's going to be a huge victory for all of the other parents who may come.

WOODRUFF: All right. Representative Jennifer Dunn being very much the diplomat. Thank you very much. Good to see you.

DUNN: Good to see you, Judy.

WOODRUFF: A victory today in the Senate for those against abortion rights. Coming up, the view from the right and the left on the controversy over late-term abortions.

But first, President Bush may not have the votes he needs to pass his budget plan. Four senators, two Democrats and two Republicans, plan to sign a letter today saying they will not support any tax-cut proposal that costs more than $350 billion. That is billions less, hundreds of billions less than what the president wants. Two Republicans have already come out against his plan. Only one Democrat, Georgia's Zell Miller is supporting the president.



WOODRUFF (voice-over): It's time again to check your "I.P. I.Q." Governor Mark Sanford isn't the only South Carolinian to have military obligations. There are two other sitting lawmakers that do as well. Who are they? A: Senator Ernest Hollings, B: Senator Lindsey Graham, C: Representative Joe Wilson and D: James Clyburn.

The correct answers are B and C. Senator Graham is in the Air Force Reserve and Representative Wilson is in the National Guard. Federal rules virtually rule out deployment for members of Congress.



WOODRUFF: From the statehouse to the military base with the nation on the eve of a war, the Governor of South Carolina gets ready to serve. I'll speak to Mark Sanford in just a moment.


WOODRUFF: Well, in addition to his regular job duties, South Carolina's governor, Mark Sanford, will soon have even more work to contend with. Sanford begins two weeks of Air Force Reserve training in Alabama in about 10 days.

Governor Sanford joins me now from Columbia, South Carolina.

Governor, good to see you again.

GOV. MARK SANFORD (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: Great to hear your voice, Judy.

WOODRUFF: Governor, you initially said back in December you didn't think you wanted to do this. You thought you were going to have to not fulfill your military commitment. Now you are. What changed your mind?

SANFORD: Really just a whole lot of soul-searching.

Neither choice, from a logistical standpoint, is ideal, because you have these huge new responsibilities as a governor. And yet, when you really went to sort of push comes to shove, the core principle is that I think everybody in America ought to serve. I happen to be one of those that really think we ought to reinstate the draft, that, again, everybody ought to be vested in the American system.

And we've done an amazing job in America disconnecting the rights that go with being American from the responsibilities that go with being American. So, at the end of the day, I decided, yes, I do have some bigger responsibilities right now. But so does every other reservist. And so I have to serve in any way that they call me and will be doing these two weeks come 10 days from now.

WOODRUFF: You're obviously in a special situation because you're the governor, one of 50 governors of a state. If your unit were called -- and you're in the 315th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron of the Air Force Reserves.

SANFORD: Correct.

WOODRUFF: If you were called up for active duty, would you go?

SANFORD: I positively would.

And that was the real question. There were, I guess, a couple of logistical cities that we had to cross. One was a constitutional question on dual-office holding. The other was a logistical question, because, in a technical sense, as a governor, you actually become a commander of a synch for each one of the different states that is out there.

But we cleared through all that. And the core principle, again, was the notion that everybody ought to serve, if they're called. That's the notion of the reserve system. It's not you deciding what's best, but rather the Air Force or the Army or the Navy deciding, we need you and here's where you ought to go.

And so, as a core principle, I thought it very important. And I also thought it, frankly, important as a father, because it goes back to the notion of duty. And what kind of signal do you want to send your kids if, when they call you, you say, no, I got this bigger responsibility? We've done that route, which is in essence what was done in Vietnam, when people had an option to get a medical degree or a law degree.

That child wouldn't go, but the poor kid from Allendale who didn't, frankly, have those educational options, they were the one that was sent to Vietnam. And I think we need to get away from that as a country.

WOODRUFF: Two very quick questions: One is some speculation about your leaving South Carolina in the hands of a relatively inexperienced 33-year-old part-time lieutenant governor. Are you comfortable about that?

SANFORD: Yes. I mean, Andre will do a great job. We've got a great team in place in terms of my chief of staff, our team in place, my wife, Jenny, who you met on occasion when I was up in Washington, is very capable, will handle some of the ceremonial things that I would have done. I think our team will be able to handle it just fine.

WOODRUFF: And last question: What are you going to be doing? And do you think you're physically fit to go off and fight if you have to?

SANFORD: I'm not the tip of the spear. The fighters are the tip of the spear. I'm at the bureaucrat level, where I'm a pen pusher.

It's interesting, though. With this training, they're going to start us every morning at 5:00 in the morning and finish at about 7:00 in the evening. And the standing bet in the office is, frankly, against me being able to make it. I think I'll be able to make it and I think I'll be just fine. But to suggest that I'm Rambo, I'm not. That's what's neat about the reserve system. There are a lot of different needs that are out there, some requiring intense physical training, others not. I happen to be in the others-not category.

WOODRUFF: All right, Governor Mark Sanford, maybe we'll talk to you after you've been through it and you can tell us what it was really like.

All right, good to see you.

SANFORD: All right.

WOODRUFF: We thank you for talking to us. Appreciate it.

SANFORD: Take care.

WOODRUFF: Heading off in 10 days, he is, for the Air Force Reserves.

Coming up: a new round in the political battle over abortion. Republicans win an eight-year-long campaign over a controversial late- term procedure. Find out what Bay Buchanan and Donna Brazile have to say about it. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WOODRUFF: Democratic presidential candidate Bob Graham back in Washington casting his first Senate votes since undergoing heart surgery a month and a half ago. On the floor today, Graham revealed that he would vote with his party in blocking a vote on judicial nominee Miguel Estrada. Later, Republicans lost a second attempt to end a Democratic filibuster.

Graham also cast a number of votes on abortion, opposing a ban on what critics call partial-birth abortion. That ban was approved by the Senate today, however, by a 64-to-33-vote margin. Democratic presidential contenders John Kerry and John Edwards missed that key vote. However, they made it for other abortion votes yesterday at the urging of Minority Leader Tom Daschle.

President Bush is expected to sign a ban on the late-term- abortion procedure, which was repeatedly vetoed by President Clinton. Republican supporters of the ban say the vote sends a message.


SEN. RICK SANTORUM (R), PENNSYLVANIA: There's no question that a majority of the United States Senate supports the Roe decision. I think that's disappointing, but I think it also points out that, even though a majority of the United States senators support Roe, almost two-thirds of them voted to ban this procedure. That tells you that there are a lot of people who are uncomfortable with what Roe v. Wade portends to -- what Roe vs. Wade, according to the courts, covers.


WOODRUFF: Abortion-rights advocates charge that a ban on the late-term procedure would be unconstitutional and would endanger women's health.

Joining us now: former Gore campaign manager Donna Brazile -- she's in Atlanta -- and Bay Buchanan, president of American Cause.

Bay, what is really accomplished by this vote today? You have this vote on the late-term procedure the opponents call partial-birth. But at the same time, they vote on whether they support Roe vs. Wade. The vote, by a majority, they do. What have you accomplished?

BAY BUCHANAN, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN CAUSE: Well, first of all, Judy, the purpose of this entire debate over partial-birth was a public-relations campaign across the country to really explain to the American people how awful this procedure really is, the procedure of abortion. And what it's doing is taking the life of a child.

And partial-birth was just an issue that we chose in which to fight. And it did an incredible job, in the sense that more and more Americans today feel that there should be some limit on abortion, maybe not going back to eliminating and banning all abortions, but some limit. This is just part of that. This is the first step. And now the president will sign this into law. And I think you'll see a real effort to move abortion back to viability, possibly, where no child can aborted that is viable outside the womb.

DONNA BRAZILE, CHAIRWOMAN, VOTING RIGHTS INSTITUTE: Well, Bay, part of that national campaign was very deceptive and very inflammatory.

In fact, of all of the abortion procedures that are performed in this country, less than 2 percent are what we call the so-called late- term abortions or partial-birth abortions. It's a manufactured issue. This bill will be struck down by the Supreme Court, which struck down a similar bill by the Nebraska legislature as unconstitutional, because it will not make exception for the health of a woman.

So, while the victory may be sweet today and the rush to pass this bill was a victory for those on the right, I do believe that the Supreme Court will once again ratify and support Roe v. Wade, the way the Senate did yesterday.

BUCHANAN: I think that if, indeed, the argument goes and the Supreme Court overturns this, I think there is going to be even greater frustration and real passion to see some dramatic change in this law and they will go another route. And I think you will see something such as viability, which I believe the Supreme Court would most definitely support.

WOODRUFF: I want to quickly turn you both to the debate over war with Iraq.

Today, the president, the Bush administration signaling they will give it some time. They're going to wait and see if they can get more support at the U.N. behind military action. This counters, though, what the president said at his news conference last week when he said, we're going to have a vote this week.

Is this a thoughtful move on the part of the White House, or, Donna, is this disarray on the part of the administration? What is going on?

BRAZILE: Judy, I think it's called backpedaling.

A week ago, they said they would call the roll, regardless of where the chips may fall. And today, they're saying they're willing to pull the rug diplomatically, which I believe will give Saddam bragging rights, which no one wants to see. And, secondly, I think it is going to hurt our country and others who are willing to fight with us long term if we do not get that vote.

I think the president should stick with his original plan to call the roll, regardless of the whip count, and see where every country lies in this important decision facing not only our country, but the world, and then, of course, decide if this is the end game for the diplomatic phase.

BUCHANAN: Well, I have to disagree on that.

There's no question this is enormously frustrating, Judy, for all of us. Americans are sick and tired of hearing, this vote is going to come, may not come, we may get it, especially in the light of the fact that the president has said it doesn't matter what the vote is; he's still going to make certain that Saddam Hussein is removed from power and disarmed.

But I think the honorable thing here is, the president's trying to help his friend Tony Blair. And that's the only reason he's postponing this. For this two-week period, we're frustrated, we're upset, but he's trying to help a friend who has been by his side throughout this. That is extremely honorable. I don't think he can help him. I think Tony Blair is has some serious political problems.

BRAZILE: But, Bay, he's also trying to make a moral case of disarming Saddam Hussein. And to sort of take your cards and go home without calling a vote is a cop-out. That's cowardly. Face down your enemy and let the chips fall where they may.

BUCHANAN: There's nothing cowardly about it.


BUCHANAN: You're going to see him go, move ahead. We're all going to forget this two weeks. He's helping a friend.

WOODRUFF: We're going to leave it there, but we hate to leave the two of you ever.


BRAZILE: Thank you.

WOODRUFF: Bay, Donna, we thank you both. We appreciate it.

BRAZILE: Thank you.

BUCHANAN: Thank you.



SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MS), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Just because the Supreme Court of the United States made the wrong decision in 2000 doesn't mean we have to live with it for another six years, my friends.


WOODRUFF: John Kerry on the stump raising big bucks for his presidential campaign.


WOODRUFF: The news media are on the minds of Wisconsin lawmakers in our "Campaign News Daily." A bill making its way to the Wisconsin legislature would prevent the release of election results in presidential races until at least two hours after the polls close. The first-of-its-kind measure has passed the state assembly and now heads to the Senate. The two-hour delay is designed to address complaints that early vote results in the East and the Midwest can suppress voter turnout on the West Coast.

Former GOP Congressman J.C. Watts is taking over a political group made famous by Newt Gingrich. Watts is the new chairman of GOPAC, an organization that recruits and trains Republican Party candidates. Watts was the only black Republican in Congress when he retired in January.

Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry is in San Francisco this afternoon, a day after raising big money at a fund-raiser. Kerry aides say last night's event at a Boston hotel brought in $2 million for the Kerry campaign. The Kerry team says that is a record haul for one night for donations from individuals.

And a quick reminder: Arizona's Democratic governor, Janet Napolitano, will be among my guests on tomorrow's INSIDE POLITICS. Among the topics: how she's handling her state's budget deficit and next year's Arizona presidential primary.

Secretary of State Colin Powell today rejected any suggestion that the Bush administration's showdown with Iraq has been engineered by Israel or by American Jews. Powell was asked about that during a House hearing today amid the continuing controversy over remarks by Congressman Jim Moran. The Virginia Democrat has apologized for suggesting that influential Jewish leaders were pushing for war. But six Jewish members of Congress called yesterday for Moran not to run for a new term.

Democrat Martin Frost joined that chorus today, but defended Moran's refusal to step down now.


REP. MARTIN FROST (D), TEXAS: No one asked Trent Lott to resign from the Senate. Trent Lott is still a United States senator. He's serving out his term. It's not a double standard. And Jim is not in a leadership position.

Jim was elected by the people of his district. He's entitled to serve out his term. I don't think he should continue after that. And I would hope that he would not run for reelection. And if he did run for reelection, I would hope that he would have a viable opponent in the Democratic primary.


WOODRUFF: House and Senate Democratic leaders have spoken out in condemnation of Congressman Moran's remarks.

Well, the best laid plans often go awry, especially in a time of war. Up next: some of the things that could go wrong in a U.S.-led war against Iraq.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) WOODRUFF: Throughout the day here on CNN, we've been examining the risks of a potential U.S.-led war in Iraq.

Here now, our Bruce Morton.


BRUCE MORTON, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): If the United States goes to war, what could go wrong? Well, for one thing, the United States could win and face a host of problems. Let's say the U.S. drops some of those big new bombs, the massive ordnance air burst, they're called, on Baghdad. Heavy casualties. How many U.S. troops would have to stay to keep order?

GEN. ERIC SHINSEKI, U.S. ARMY CHIEF OF STAFF: I would say what's been mobilized to this point. Something on the order of several hundred thousand soldiers are probably a figure that would be required.

MORTON: Others in the Pentagon say that's way too high, but Shinseki is a professional soldier with experience in Bosnia.

And how long would they stay? The U.S. has had troops in Germany since the end of World War II, even though the Cold War ended more than a dozen years ago. The U.S. has had soldiers in the Korean demilitarized zone for more than a half-a-century. How long in Baghdad? Who knows. The U.S. would try to rebuild, give aid. How much would it cost?

REP. JOHN LEWIS (D), GEORGIA: How much will the humanitarian cost be? Would we be robbing from our children? Would we be stealing from our senior citizens?

MORTON: Mr. Bush says Iraq will be a democracy. That didn't happen in Kuwait, which his father freed after Saddam Hussein took it in the first Gulf War. It hasn't happened in Afghanistan, though U.S. troops did chase the Taliban from power.

And other consequences: If casualties are high, will that encourage terrorist attacks on the U.S.? Might the Saudis, trying to stay in power and pacify angry citizens, order the U.S. out and send the price of oil soaring? Might the French, the Germans, other Europeans, angry at America's unilateral victory, refuse to help in reconstruction, leaving the U.S. to pay all the bills?

And wouldn't that anger make NATO useless, make the United Nations just a venue for hot-tempered speeches? This president's father waged a short, successful war and lost the White House anyway. Could angry Americans turn on this Bush, too?

LEWIS: I think the president is taking a big, big gamble here. The American people are very troubled and they're very divided.

MORTON: It's all conjecture, of course. A war could be short, successful, relatively inexpensive. No one can know. But the costs of war are very real and very high, not just money, lives. And the road to war is a winding road. No one who starts down it can see its end.

Bruce Morton, CNN, Washington.


WOODRUFF: Our daylong spotlight on the risks of war continues at the top of the hour. Wolf Blitzer takes a look at some worst-case scenarios of what could go wrong.

A former New York first lady is headed back to the altar -- engagement news from the Big Apple when INSIDE POLITICS returns.


WOODRUFF: Finally, after a nasty divorce that helped to keep the New York tabloids in business, former Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Donna Hanover both have moved on.

Hanover announced today that she's engaged to marry her high school sweetheart this summer. They appeared together outside Tiffany's, where they were looking at wedding bands. Rudy Giuliani has been engaged since November to Judith Nathan. A spokesman says the former mayor wishes his ex and her intended all the best and all happiness. All's well that ends well.

That's it for INSIDE POLITICS. Thanks for joining us. I'm Judy Woodruff.


International Edition
CNN TV CNN International Headline News Transcripts Advertise With Us About Us
   The Web     
Powered by
© 2005 Cable News Network LP, LLLP.
A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our privacy guidelines. Contact us.
external link
All external sites will open in a new browser. does not endorse external sites.
 Premium content icon Denotes premium content.
Add RSS headlines.